They provide oxygen and food and create a healthy environment: plants are vital and yet increasingly threatened. Professor Tina Romeis at the Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry (IPB) in Halle is researching how their resistance to drought and other stress factors can be specifically improved.

Professor Romeis, climate change is affecting plants worldwide. Even in our latitudes, trees, shrubs and many other plants have been affected by the droughts of recent years. Does this concern you in your research?
Yes, drought stress is a major issue for me and many of my colleagues here at the institute. As basic researchers, we want to understand down to the molecular details what happens in plants during prolonged water shortages. With this knowledge, it should be possible to increase their resistance in a targeted way.

How are you tackling the problem?
Our institute specializes in small molecules. We focus on certain metabolites that make a decisive contribution to a plant’s resistance to drought. We determine such metabolites in plants that cope differently well with water shortages. Trees such as beech and oak still have a fairly high drought tolerance, while conifers have major problems. We also identify the small molecules in signaling pathways that spread information about environmental conditions within a plant. The plant also uses these pathways to mobilize its defenses, for example in the event of water shortage.

© IPB

 In the foyer of the Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry (IPB) in Halle.

How can we imagine plant defenses?
When plants are attacked, for example by bacteria or feeding insects, they activate defense mechanisms and substances with which they can defend themselves against future attacks. Calcium-dependent protein kinases are involved in this, and I am particularly interested in them in my research. These are enzymes that are not only important for the immune defense of plants, they also shape plant stress tolerance to drought, cold and nutrient deficiency. Interestingly, there are similar calcium-regulated protein kinases in the human brain that are critical for learning and memory.

Can plants also remember?
Yes, you can certainly say that. Of course, plants don’t have a brain or nervous system like we humans do. But they do have a kind of molecular memory. My research group is investigating exactly how it works, what information plants store in the short or long term, and what factors regulate the forgetting of information.

What do you do with findings that could be interesting for application?
If that’s the case, we turn to the Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research in nearby Gatersleben. The exchange and cooperation between our institutes works excellently and the division of roles is mutually agreed: We at the IPB are responsible for basic biochemical research, while Gatersleben has species-rich seed banks that are ideally suited for new breeding or targeted genetic modification.

Such developments are very important for feeding a growing world population under climate change. Does this have an impact on your work?
Admittedly, we do not carry out plant breeding, so we do not provide directly applicable solutions. But the questions we ask in our basic biochemical research are naturally guided by global challenges such as climate change. The fact that these research questions urgently need to be answered is also evident from the fact that science in our field is booming worldwide. In Germany, we are currently still in a very good position. However, I am somewhat skeptical about the future. Many young people don’t want to do a doctorate after graduation. Among them, I observe a strong interest in nature conservation, environmental management and ecological education – basic research is not their main concern.

Was that the reason why you moved from Freie Universität Berlin to the Leibniz Research Institute in Halle three years ago?
I wanted to concentrate on research, and the conditions at the IPB are ideal for that. The equipment we have here is something you can only dream of at most universities. One example is our mass spectrometer, which we use to determine the masses of atoms and molecules in plants, another is the confocal microscope, which makes tiny plant reactions visible. And with the help of so-called FRET microscopy, we can observe biochemical processes in the plant live.

© IPB

With this confocal microscope, the scientists led by Professor Romeis study the behaviour of living plants under different conditions, such as severe drought. The image tiles on the screen show the same leaf of the thale cress Arabidopsis thaliana, which is frequently used for research purposes. Individual sphincter cells (stomata) on the underside of a leaf are shown – they control the gas exchange and water balance in the plant. The microscope demonstrates the biochemical processes that lead to the opening of the cells in favourable conditions and to their closing in dry conditions.

These sound like good prerequisites for success stories.
And there are always success stories, even across disciplines. Just a few months ago, a spectacular discovery was published to which research at our institute contributed. It was about the trigger of a mysterious neurodegenerative disease in bald eagles, which was identified after years of joint research with American scientists. Since the 1990s, the disease had killed many birds, reptiles and fish in the southern United States. The cause was a toxin produced by cyanobacteria that thrive on certain aquatic plants in the affected areas. The study was published as a cover story in the journal “Science” and brought large reputation to plant research in Halle. My colleagues at the institute have now just succeeded in the total chemical synthesis of this toxin, which is a toxic metabolite.

The study was also reported in the German media. Was that due to the attractive topic or is public interest in scientific topics generally high?
It had a lot to do with the particular subject matter. In general, I’m observing an increasing scientific fatigue and a loss of confidence. The many plagiarism scandals have done a lot of damage to the relationship between science and society. We have a lot of catching up to do.

What role can the GDNÄ play in this? After all, the exchange with society is one of its major concerns.
I believe that the GDNÄ can achieve a lot here. It is a neutral body and does not represent any specific professional interests. That is a good basis for a trusting dialog with the public.

In the GDNÄ, you have recently started representing the subject of biology. What would you like to achieve in this function?
Plants are extremely important for our lives, for energy supply and the entire ecosystem, and they are becoming increasingly important. In addition, plants are beautiful and fascinating. I would like to raise awareness of that and also communicate it to the next generation. The GDNÄ’s programs for students and teachers offer excellent opportunities for this.

Berlin-based experimental physicist Thomas Elsässer uses ultrashort light pulses to make tiny movements of matter visible. What he and his team are investigating is of great practical use for the development of new materials, for medicine and biology – and for a fast, stable Internet. 

Professor Elsässer, you head the Max Born Institute for Nonlinear Optics and Short Pulse Spectroscopy.  That sounds pretty complicated. Can you explain it simply?
We generate ultra-short and ultra-intense light pulses and study their interaction with matter. In this way, we can image and precisely study extremely fast processes in atoms and molecules.

So you are doing speed imaging in a world that is normally hidden from the human eye?
Yes, you could put it that way. In fact, it is now possible to follow electron movements in solids, molecular movements in liquids or the processes of chemical reactions in real time. First, the process under investigation is triggered by an ultrashort light pulse, and then, in the next step, a second light pulse is used to determine the current value of an optical measurand, for example the instantaneous reflectance of a molecular sample. Repeated measurements result in a sequence of snapshots that show a sequence of movements, similar to a motion picture film. But it’s not just about observing and imaging: Tailored ultrashort light pulses can also be used to specifically control processes, for example to optimize chemical reactions.

Ultrashort pulses are obviously the linchpin: What exactly is meant by this?
We’re talking about light flashes lasting just a few femtoseconds. A femtosecond is one billionth of a millionth of a second. Such unimaginably short light pulses, in which a power of several million megawatts is concentrated for a very short time, are generated in special lasers. This is the only way to study ultrashort processes in matter.

© Max-Born-Institut

An experimental setup for generating intense femtosecond pulses in the infrared range at a wavelength of five micrometers. At the Max Born Institute, the system is used to generate ultrashort hard X-ray pulses.

Can the findings also be applied in practice?
Yes, there are already a large number of applications in the technical and medical fields, and new ones are being added all the time. One example is the Internet, whose main strand today consists of fiber optic cables. There, huge amounts of data are transmitted with light pulses in the picosecond range – a picosecond is one millionth of a millionth of a second. Another example comes from materials science: If materials are processed with a femtosecond laser, high-precision holes can be produced without fraying the edges. Very good experience has been made with this in the production of injection nozzles. Or let’s take medicine: Here, research in my field is contributing to ever more precise imaging processes and precisely fitting laser therapies, for example for retinal welding in ophthalmology.

What are the major trends in your field?
Currently, there is massive international investment in large-scale machines to detect ultrafast structural changes in matter with ultrashort X-ray pulses. Applications range from physics, chemistry and materials research to biology. Such large-scale machines already exist in Stanford, Hamburg, Rüschlikon and some Asian countries, and further machines are under construction elsewhere. It is already clear that the determination of instantaneous atomic structures together with results from ultrafast spectroscopy can capture the dynamics of matter down to the smallest detail.

What are the current focal points at your institute?
In my research group, the main focus is currently on the BIOVIB project, for which I have received a second ERC grant in 2019, associated with funding of 2.5 million euros. With BIOVIB, we are trying to elucidate dynamic electrical interactions in biological macromolecules. The current focus is on transfer RNA, or tRNA for short, which reads information from messenger RNA (mRNA) in the cell like a read head and enables the synthesis of proteins from amino acids. The structure of tRNA is stabilized by electrical interactions with its environment, which we would like to understand in detail. If we find the right starting points here, targeted modifications in the sense of molecular engineering are also conceivable. Other groups at the institute are working, for example, on the dynamics of electrons in the sub-femtosecond time range and ultrafast magnetic processes.

Today, the Max Born Institute is a vital, renowned research institution. Was this foreseeable in 1993 when you came to the southeast of Berlin?
I hoped so, of course, but it was not yet apparent at the time. At the beginning of the 1990s, the Adlershof research site was not yet competitive and at times looked like a sandy desert with rather dilapidated buildings. Our institute had emerged from parts of the Central Institute for Optics and Spectroscopy of the Academy of Sciences of the GDR and over the years transformed itself into an internationally competitive research facility. We have received much support along the way, including excellent cooperation with other research institutions in the region. Our basic funding from the federal and state governments, and here primarily from the state of Berlin, is good. As a scientist, I have every freedom. I really can’t complain.

So you are fully satisfied?
Not entirely. We are critical of the planned new Higher Education Act for Berlin, which will give the Senate significantly more influence, for example in appointing professors. In general, we have problems with the increasing density of regulations in research and administration. This often takes on Kafkaesque features, delays the allocation of research funds, and thus damages our competitiveness. The shortage of funds at Berlin’s universities is also a major problem for non-university research, because the universities are very important partners for us. Unfortunately, there is a pronounced culture of mistrust in some places in the Berlin administration, quite unlike in other federal states. This is not good for science at all.

You are committed to science and research far beyond your institute. What drives you?
I simply enjoy thinking outside the box and contributing my own experience. For example, at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, where I am currently involved in several projects. For example, we are looking at scientific freedom and cancel culture in academia, i.e., the trend toward excluding scientists with dissenting opinions. I also often give school talks in Brandenburg and talk to young people about my research, life as a scientist, and their ideas for the future.

You have been a member of the GDNÄ for many years and are involved as a representative of the subject of physics. Is there anything you would like to achieve in this role?
It would be wonderful if we could involve the public and especially young people even more – I would very much like to contribute to that. I was able to experience that the GDNÄ has an excellent image in the scientific community when we invited professional colleagues to give lectures at the 200th anniversary celebration in Leipzig: There were only acceptances. A good idea to strengthen the cohesion of the members between meetings are regional meetings. And we can certainly expand the programs for schoolchildren, which are already excellent. For example, with free Zoom lectures for young people – I would get involved in that right away. For adults, we could put info flyers on the web on relevant, current issues, such as electricity transport from the coasts to the south, climate change, or topics related to the Internet. The GDNÄ has a great deal of expertise in this area.

The deep sea is dark and bitterly cold – and yet it is full of life. Marine biologist Angelika Brandt explores this mysterious world and makes fascinating discoveries time and again.

Professor Brandt, your research is based on journeys to distant ocean regions. Where have you already been on expeditions?
Many of my research trips were to the Polar Regions. I have been to Antarctica ten times and to the European Northern Seas and the Northwest Pacific eight times – always for several weeks.

Are such research trips also possible in Corona times?
They are not impossible. A current example is: After a long back and forth with permits, logistics, visas and all the health precautions, we finally got the green light for a German-Russian expedition to the Bering Sea a few weeks ago. The application has been done in 2016, and the expedition was supposed to start on 4 June in Petropavlovsk Kamchatsky on the Kamchatka Peninsula and last until 12 July. There are now technical problems at short notice. It would be a miracle for us to be able to leave after all. Research expeditions are enormously complex undertakings, something can always come up – and the susceptibility to breakdowns naturally increases in times of pandemic.

© Thomas Walter

The German deep-sea research vessel “Sonne”: equipped by scientists with state-of-the-art marine technology, including autonomous and remote-controlled underwater vehicles, trawled gear and corers.

And if the expedition remains cancelled?
Then the German-Russian research expedition will be postponed for an uncertain period of time. For the time being, we can only hope for the next expedition. It will take place in 2022 with the German deep-sea research vessel Sonne under my command in the North Pacific Aleutian Trench.

What significance do the expeditions have for your work?
They provide the basis for our research work. We usually bring home very extensive animal material and initial data from an expedition that lasts several weeks. In our laboratories, we then subject the samples to elaborate morphological, anatomical and genetic analyses. This has already resulted in many doctoral theses and publications with widely respected discoveries and findings.

Do you have an example for us?
In the Northwest Pacific, we were able to identify hundreds of previously unknown species in the deep sea. At a depth of 8700 metres, for example, we discovered a shell crab that had previously only been known from depths of around 4000 metres. The discovery was also so surprising because it had been assumed that these animals could not exist under the enormous water pressure in the hadal – as we call the sphere from 6000 metres below sea level. A mistake, as our expeditions show.

What is the overall environment like for living creatures at these depths?
Below 1000 metres it is pretty dark, the temperature is usually one to two degrees Celsius, there is a pressure of more than a ton on every square centimetre and the food supply is meagre. And yet, rich biotic communities can be found in the deep sea. Species numbers usually increase down to depths of 4000 metres, and decrease again in deep-sea trenches from 6000 metres. The species present at great depths are often gigantic. We were able to observe this trend towards gigantism with increasing depth in the Northwest Pacific Kuril-Kamchatka Trench as well as in the Southern Ocean.

© Nils Brenke

Deep-sea shrimp in the Northwest Pacific Ocean at a depth of 5378 metres.

You already mentioned ostracods: what other species are there down there?
Bristle worms, hooked weevils, furrowed feet, sea cucumbers – and always marine isopods. They are my favourite species and they are even still found in the deepest ocean trenches, more than ten kilometres below sea level. One of our particularly interesting finds in the Northwest Pacific was a living fossil. I published a first inventory of biodiversity in the Northwest Pacific in 2020 together with colleagues from around forty countries. In our online Deep Sea Atlas, we describe more than 500 deep-sea species that we found during four expeditions in this region.

What makes the Northwest Pacific so interesting for your research?
It is one of the most fertile, nutrient-rich and species-rich oceans in the world. It has sea basins of varying depths and interconnected or isolated habitats such as the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk. Moreover, there are excellent comparative data for these regions, which we owe to eleven Russian expeditions with the research vessel Vityas between 1950 and 1977. Against this background, we can identify changes in biodiversity over the decades and explore connections: for example, with climate change or certain human activities.

What changes are you observing and how can they be explained?
We recently compiled our findings on the fauna of the Northwest Pacific and published them in a scientific journal in 2020. They confirm what research has been showing for years: In the oceans, climate change in particular is causing major upheavals: The water is getting warmer, ice shelves are melting, sea levels are rising and ocean currents are changing. All this has consequences for the food web and the living environment in the ocean. We are seeing rapid changes in the Arctic Ocean. Many species are migrating there from more southerly regions, for example crustaceans and molluscs. Conversely, numerous species are also migrating southwards from the Arctic Ocean. In the Southern Ocean, too, great changes have begun. The melting of huge ice shelves is freeing up habitat for new species. For other species, food is becoming scarce. This has to do with the algae that grow under the ice and on which krill, for example, feed. These are tiny crustaceans found in huge quantities, which in turn serve as the main food for whales, seals, penguins and many other species. So less sea ice means less algae, less krill and less large fauna. Antarctic wildlife will soon be different, we are convinced.

And what will happen then?
That is one of the big research questions that our expeditions are about.

How do you get the samples you need for your observations?
With trawls, for example with the so-called Agassiztrawl, or with epibenthic sleds. These are collection devices that are pulled over the bottom to pick up the organisms in the deep-sea mud. We also often use grab systems that punch out pieces from the seabed. With the help of a large box grab, for example, we can bring a quarter of a square metre of sediment from the ocean floor with the organisms in it onto the deck. By the way, even in the most remote ocean regions there is always a lot of plastic waste: drift nets, bags, shoe soles, pillboxes and a lot of microplastic that accumulates even at depths of more than 9000 metres.

© Thomas Walter

Ready for scientific examination: sediment cores from the seabed.

How can we imagine everyday life on board a research vessel?
(Angelika Brandt laughs): You work all the time and fall into bed leaden at night. At most, I only have enough energy for a few pages of my favourite crime novel. While one shift is sleeping, the other is on deck taking rehearsals – that goes on around the clock and is quite exhausting. Most of the time we have no or very poor internet connection. Consequently, there are no video conferences and the like. For a few weeks, that’s not so bad. The seclusion, the concentrated research always do me good personally. Together with the crew, usually around seventy of us, I make sure that samples are taken from the sea, sorted, preserved and carefully prepared for later analysis. Back in the harbour, the material is then packed into refrigerated containers and taken to the local laboratories.

How do international crews manage to work together in a small space?
Everyone has their own research questions, but they all pull together and pursue a common overarching goal. For example, it’s about changes in the fauna of a marine region against the background of global change. This can be researched on different groups of animals and with a wide variety of methods. Ideally, experts are on board for as many as possible, but especially for the most common groups of organisms such as nematodes, crustaceans, molluscs and echinoderms. We try to recruit the best from all over the world and communicate with each other in English.

© Thomas Walter

Deep-sea expeditions work in shifts – every weekend and also at night.

The UN Decade of Ocean Exploration 2021-2030 has just begun. What are your hopes for it?
That we will gain a better understanding of the ecosystem functions of marine biodiversity, including its importance for humans.  This is the only way we can avert the dangers to marine biodiversity. I see a major risk in deep-sea mining, which can probably hardly be prevented. Along with the sediment in which valuable raw materials are stored, many species are also removed in large quantities and biotic communities are being destroyed. It would be better not to allow much of what is currently being considered in the first place. If it does take place, very careful biological monitoring is essential. 

You have been in the GDNÄ for about thirty years. What does it mean to you?
Even as a doctoral student, I was fascinated by the great tradition of the GDNÄ and its scientific diversity. So far I have not been very involved, but that is changing. As group chair of biology, and specifically as a representative of marine research, I will help shape the 2022 anniversary conference. 

What is important to you?
Sophisticated, up-to-date, easy-to-understand lectures and lively discussions. And an exciting programme for schoolchildren. I think it’s great that the GDNÄ is so broadly positioned, does a lot for young people and is not elitist at all.

Finally, please take a look into the crystal ball: How do you see the future of the GDNÄ?
In my field of research, we think in large time frames. Due to its scientific breadth and topicality, I would say: the GDNÄ will still exist in 500 years!

A sustainable energy supply for humanity – this is the visionary goal of Max Planck scientist Wolfgang Lubitz’s research. He also has big plans for the GDNÄ.

Professor Lubitz, you are director emeritus at the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Energy Conversion in Mülheim. How can we imagine your everyday life at the moment?
I’m still often at the institute, but I also work a lot from home at the moment. By and large, it’s about gradually completing my research projects. I’ve been emeritus for almost four years now and want to create more free space for other things. I’m currently making the final corrections to a book chapter.

What is the topic?
The book is about chemical energy storage and in one chapter I describe how solar energy is converted and stored in nature through photosynthesis.

Why is this process so interesting for you?
It is the great model for sustainable energy storage – even though much of the incident, abundant solar energy is lost. At this point I would like to expand a little to clarify the connections: We owe all our food, all renewable raw materials and fossil fuels on earth to photosynthesis. A central step in photosynthesis is the light-induced splitting of water, whereby oxygen is produced as a waste product. This has led to the formation of our oxygen-rich Earth’s atmosphere and also the ozone layer in the stratosphere that protects us, thus creating the prerequisite for the emergence of higher life on our planet. Photosynthesis absorbs enormous amounts of carbon dioxide from the air and converts it into carbohydrates, which ultimately store the sun’s energy. Storage in chemical compounds – in fuels – is by far the most efficient form of storage for energy.

Wolfgang Lubitz with young scientists in a laboratory at the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Energy Conversion in Mülheim. In the background you can see superstructures of a high-field EPR machine. EPR techniques have been used to gain important insights into the electronic structure of catalysts. 

So much for biochemistry. How do we now get to technical use?
The idea is to use such processes, for example, to store regeneratively generated electricity and transport it over long distances. In principle, sun and wind supply more than enough clean energy to meet global demand, but where they are needed, they are not always available in sufficient quantities. That is why at our institute we are looking for ways to efficiently convert energy into forms that can be stored and used. Artificial photosynthesis is one possibility that is being intensively researched by us and many other working groups.

What have you already achieved?
In the meantime, we have a fairly precise idea of how natural photosynthesis works. These findings are important, among other things, to realise an efficient splitting of water into its components oxygen and hydrogen in the laboratory. The necessary catalysts play a key role in this process: In nature, these are the enzymes water oxidase and hydrogenases.  Roughly speaking, photosynthesis is still familiar to many from school lessons, but our research is about the finer details.

Do you have an example for us?
Nature uses enzymes for its reactions that contain common and inexpensive metals such as manganese, iron and nickel. For chemical-technical use, however, precious metals such as platinum are almost exclusively used as catalysts today, which work very well, but whose deposits are unfortunately limited. Following nature’s example, we are therefore looking for new metal catalysts to make the future large-scale production of hydrogen as efficient as it is environmentally friendly. The goal is therefore the so-called green hydrogen, which not only plays a central role for the energy supply of the future, but also as one of the most important basic materials in industry.

Are there already results?
Catalytic water oxidation and hydrogen production are very intensively worked on research areas worldwide, and considerable successes have been achieved in recent years. However, a perfect catalyst that meets all the requirements in terms of efficiency, stability, scalability, eco-friendliness, material availability and price and has proven itself in practice does not yet exist. So there is still a lot of room for good ideas and developments in this hot field of research.

The entire hydrogen economy is a hot topic at the moment. What chances do you see for it?
We are now very good at generating regenerative electricity, for example with the help of photovoltaics, which today achieve efficiencies of around 25 percent for silicon cells and more than 45 percent for more complex PV cells. Storage remains a problem. Batteries are widely accepted by society, for example in electromobility, but they are not very efficient and also not environmentally friendly. Hydrogen can store many times more energy and its combustion produces only water.  It is suitable for large-scale use and forms a very good bridge from the fossil to a sustainable energy era.

Your research in this exciting field is, as you said, gradually running out. Does that mean you will have more time for the GDNÄ in the future?
Yes, and I am looking forward to that. As a member of the Board of Directors, for example, I’m very happy to contribute to the preparations for the 200th anniversary celebration, which is to take place in Leipzig in 2022. Great ideas are being put together there right now. I don’t want to give too much away yet, but the lectures and discussions will take place in the attractive congress centre of the trade fair city and the supporting programme partly in the famous Leipzig Zoo. There will be a student and visitor programme and many highly interesting lectures from different disciplines. For the Nobel Prize lecture we have invited Reinhard Genzel, who discovered the gigantic black hole at the heart of our Milky Way.

Investigating samples of photosynthesis in green light using electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy.

Founded in Leipzig in 1822, the GDNÄ has a long tradition. What does this scientific society mean to you?
Very much. The GDNÄ has done great things for German science. At its meetings, important scientific findings were presented and debated; there were many disputes, but also consensus. In the era of industrialization, the GDNÄ made a significant contribution to the public learning about and accepting new  research results. A caesura was the Nazi era. What these years meant for the GDNÄ should, in my opinion, be examined more closely. The anniversary next year would be a suitable occasion for this.

What future do you see for the GDNÄ?
There are big tasks waiting. On the one hand, there is the immensely important dialogue with the public, but also the interdisciplinary dialogue between the scientific disciplines should be intensified in Germany. The funding agencies are increasingly demanding this, and the GDNÄ could provide important impulses here.  Another point is the cooperation with schools. In my experience, interest in mathematics, computer science, natural sciences and technology is growing, because many young people realise how important these subjects are for the future. The GDNÄ is already involved here with its students programme. But in cooperation with other scientific societies we could do much more.

A big programme you are outlining…
…Wait, please, I am not finished yet. I would also like the GDNÄ to raise the possible implications of scientific findings. Often these have led to historical upheavals, just think of the discovery of uranium fission and its consequences in the form of the atomic bomb and nuclear power. Our entire modern life is shaped by research and technology – without it, there would be no internet or modern telecommunications, no antibiotics and vaccines, and no insights into environmental and climate protection or renewable energies. So it is not presumptuous to say: scientists change the world. What I also want is more understanding of the methodology of science. Their results develop in carefully planned and executed experiments, which are often error-prone and have to be validated several times until a reliable result is available. None of this works at the push of a button, it takes time. I am happy to contribute to creating awareness and building trust in science – together with the GDNÄ.

Michael Tausch, innovation researcher at the University of Wuppertal, on the enormous potential of solar energy, outdated curricula and his promotion of the chemistry of light

Professor Tausch, what are you working on right now?
I’m currently creating material packages for chemistry classes. With these, I want to help teachers create lively, substantive and contemporary lessons in homeschooling as well.

How can we imagine such a material package?
The current topic is light – color – energy. For this, I am putting together digital learning paths from texts and videos of experiments and for this I can draw from a large pool. I take a lot from the publicly accessible website “Chemistry with Light” of my research group at the University of Wuppertal, others from my own publications on chemistry didactics. As soon as real experiments are possible again in face-to-face classes, the recorded experiments should be carried out for real – that’s the idea.

How does your package get to the teachers?
As soon as it is ready, I send it to the various state education servers. There, the materials are integrated and made available to the schools free of charge. This can go quite smoothly, as experience with previous deliveries has shown.

Are teachers already waiting impatiently for your package of materials?
Maybe some of them are (laughs). These are the ones who know us and use our materials profitably in the classroom. Others may still be reluctant to accept the offer.

Why is that?
Chemistry with light, or photochemistry in technical terms, has not yet made it into the curricula – it is therefore not a compulsory subject. Even during their studies, most of today’s teachers had no contact with the subject. Some shy away from it because they consider the subject to be difficult and believe that expensive equipment and toxic reagents are needed for teaching.

Is this a misconception?
Yes, chemistry with light can be taught with very simple, harmless and inexpensive chemicals and equipment – not only in lower and upper secondary schools, but sometimes even in kindergarten. There are wonderful, expressive experiments with sunlight, bottles and LED flashlights. Details can be found on the aforementioned website “Chemistry with Light” and in the textbook of the same name, which is aimed at student teachers, teaching staff and interested laypersons. Incidentally, our training courses regularly produce aha experiences: Many teachers then realize how easily photochemistry can be integrated into existing curricula – not only in chemistry lessons, but also in other science subjects.

In an instructional course, Michael Tausch shows how to build a miniature photogalvanic concentration cell from simple materials and use it to generate electricity.

How did your enthusiasm for photochemistry come about?
I became involved with this fascinating subject as a young researcher, at that time still at the Research Institute for Organic Chemistry in Bucharest. After moving to Germany, I worked for twenty years as a teacher of chemistry and mathematics, during which time I developed numerous photochemical experiments to illustrate, for example, the processes of photosynthesis or the formation and decomposition of ozone. Even then, it became apparent that sunlight would be the most important and sustainable form of energy in the 21st century. Since then, a great deal has happened in research and technology – and as a professor, I try to bring this knowledge into teacher training at university and into schools.

At present, solar radiation makes only a limited contribution to the energy supply. What makes you so optimistic?  
Among other things, the enormous potential: sunlight is clean, free and virtually inexhaustible. The light irradiation of just one day could be enough to supply all of humanity with energy for a year. Through photovoltaics, solar thermal energy and other processes, we use this resource only to a small extent. What we need are new technologies for converting, storing and efficiently using solar light. Artificial photosynthesis, for example, can be used to produce climate-neutral fuels and basic chemicals. Novel materials, opto-electronic components and new micro- and nanoscopic processes – photochemistry can also contribute to this.

A grand vision. How can it be realized?
We would need to capture as much sunlight as possible. A few solar panels on the roof are not enough. In the future, windows and car roofs could also serve as solar cells – corresponding approaches already exist. Flexible platforms in the ocean the size of several soccer fields could also capture sunlight and make it available both photovoltaically and photocatalytically. There are virtually no limits to human creativity – and I want to stimulate it with my work.

What do you plan to do next?
Hopefully the pandemic will be over soon. I can’t wait to get back out there and give workshops for student teachers and teachers all over the country.